Let's start a new thread about this:
On Jan 7, 2008 2:59 PM, JJDaNiMoTh jjdanimoth@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 16:17:06 +0100 "Ronald van Haren" pressh@gmail.com wrote:
Okay, I will sponsor Mateusz. This will start a five day discussion
period.
I'm not again request of Mateusz (and your sponsorship).. but I want to post this question: Can a fresh (very very fresh :D) TU sponsors requests? I think yes, I don't read anything in bylaws. But.. is it right? Because, I'm sure about the great work that you and Mateusz (if he will be accepted as a TU) will done, but how about a 'testing period'? I'm sure that all of us doesn't born learned ( uhm, english language doesn't give the idea that italian does :P ) and that new TUs need time to learn all TUs functions, starting from bugtracker to all small thing never written but that we daily use.
All that I've written is in my honest opinion, and it is a comment about the _future_ and not for present.
-- JJDaNiMoTh - ArchLinux Trusted User
I respect your opinion. I invite everyone to give his opinion on this and have an open minded discussion.
My 2 cents: I certainly think it should be possible. In my opinion you are elected as a TU, and not a TU trainee. See it in this way. If you get a new job it is also possible for you to propose changes. At your proposals should be looked upon in greater care (however it is always important to look at it with care), but you are allowed to propose things. That is what in my opinion is exactly what should happen. We have a voting mechanism, every TU is allowed to vote (actually I think you should vote) yes, no, or abstain. So if you think someone should not make a good new TU, you should vote NO. It is that easy.
Like you say, you learn by doing things. Sponsoring someone is also doing something.
On Jan 7, 2008 11:24 PM, Ronald van Haren pressh@gmail.com wrote:
My 2 cents: I certainly think it should be possible. In my opinion you are elected as a TU, and not a TU trainee. See it in this way. If you get a new job it is also possible for you to propose changes. At your proposals should be looked upon in greater care (however it is always important to look at it with care), but you are allowed to propose things. That is what in my opinion is exactly what should happen. We have a voting mechanism, every TU is allowed to vote (actually I think you should vote) yes, no, or abstain. So if you think someone should not make a good new TU, you should vote NO. It is that easy.
I think I have to agree with Ronald that there is, of course, nothing stopping people from voting no if they do not agree with the sponsorship of a new TU. As long as we have that choice there really isn't anything stopping a TU no matter how new from sponsoring another.
2008/1/7, Callan Barrett wizzomafizzo@gmail.com:
I think I have to agree with Ronald that there is, of course, nothing stopping people from voting no if they do not agree with the sponsorship of a new TU. As long as we have that choice there really isn't anything stopping a TU no matter how new from sponsoring another.
I respect your opinions too. My 2 cents: I think that it would be better if TUs could make it after at least three months of activity.
On Jan 7, 2008 8:04 PM, Callan Barrett wizzomafizzo@gmail.com wrote:
I think I have to agree with Ronald that there is, of course, nothing stopping people from voting no if they do not agree with the sponsorship of a new TU. As long as we have that choice there really isn't anything stopping a TU no matter how new from sponsoring another.
--
I'm with Callan on this one. Like he says, a sponsorship does not mean the person in question is elected. A potential TU still has to go through the voting process, and that involves all of us.
Varun Acharya escreveu:
On Jan 7, 2008 8:04 PM, Callan Barrett wizzomafizzo@gmail.com wrote:
I think I have to agree with Ronald that there is, of course, nothing stopping people from voting no if they do not agree with the sponsorship of a new TU. As long as we have that choice there really isn't anything stopping a TU no matter how new from sponsoring another.
--
I'm with Callan on this one. Like he says, a sponsorship does not mean the person in question is elected. A potential TU still has to go through the voting process, and that involves all of us.
Im with this opinion too. I agree with Callan, and if a candidate already passed the voting process i dont see a reason why he/she could not start sponsoring just after the voting process.
On Jan 7, 2008 2:36 PM, Douglas Soares de Andrade dsandrade@gmail.com wrote:
Im with this opinion too. I agree with Callan, and if a candidate already passed the voting process i dont see a reason why he/she could not start sponsoring just after the voting process.
I think the same.
aur-general@lists.archlinux.org